Final Authority

[sojourner]

Dr. Hinton believes
the scripture words
of the KJV Bibles
are infallible.

He's teaches at Harvard today.

AV Publications

.

Hmm... there's no record of a Dr. Hinton in either the religious studies dept. or seminary at Harvard.

 

[sojourner]

Well Sojourner, you must be smarter
than the 54 translators of the
King James Holy Bible,
the founders of Harvard, Yale
and Princeton, Dr. Riplinger, Dr. Hinton
and Dr. Ruckman.

Dr. Ruckman believed the scripture
words of the KJV Bibles are infallible.
He read 6,000 books before his
doctorate and a KJV Bible 150 times.

You're more spiritual than Susan Wesley
and John Wesley and wiser than
George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.

Not only do you not need to read books
to know the contents, you don't even need to write a dissertation to know what
you're talking about.

Maybe you and Dr. Wikipedia
should start a college.


.

Ruckman's also a maverick -- had to start his own college because he disagreed with so many others over his stance on the bible. He was also possibly schizophrenic, given to hearing voices and having "religious experiences." I don't know why you're buying into this near-conspiracy theory regarding biblical "inerrancy" and the KJV. Perhaps these bible scholars of yours could work Area 51, the Illuminati and the MIB into their findings?

 

[James2028]

You Tube Music

Lee Williams - I Do

Lee Williams - I Can't Give Up Now

 

[James2028]

You Tube
(3 minute clip)
Dr. Peter Ruckman, Ph.D.

The King James Holy Bible
Lineage of Absolute Truth

.

 

[sojourner]

You Tube
(3 minute clip)
Dr. Peter Ruckman, Ph.D.

The King James Holy Bible
Lineage of Absolute Truth

.

You need to embed this as a link. Otherwise, it won't open.

 

[sojourner]

You Tube
(3 minute clip)
Dr. Peter Ruckman, Ph.D.

The King James Holy Bible
Lineage of Absolute Truth

.

The guy's a nut-job. He can't prove any of his assertions. HIs premise is faulty, so his conclusions are faulty. he may as well be driving around in a wagon, selling his snake-oil to the gullible.

 

[InChrist]

That would be an odd thing for you to say, and
i'd challenge it on the basis of the law of cause and
effect. Everything has a reason for happening.

One autumn day as an undergrad I was
walking across campus with this other girl.
An colorful leaf fell at our feet.

She picked it up and exclaimed. "Look,
God sent this to us as a symbol of the Terinity!"

I took it, saw it had five parts; three large, two small.

"So why does it have five parts?"

"Oh you are right. It is a symbol of the pentarch."

There are reasons for everything.

No sane person would think the reason that leaf
fell as it did was to represent the Trinity.

You, like everybody who believes in every
different version of every different religion
there ever existed did so for a reason.

Good and sufficient reason is not the same as
just "reason".

But never mind. you did not understand a word of
the post to which you responded with that ridiculous
question, and you wont understand this either.

I don't think calling my question ridiculous is very conducive to conversation. But I've noticed you make a lot of assumptions and judgements.

 

[Audie]

I don't think calling my question ridiculous is very conducive to conversation. But I've noticed you make a lot of assumptions and judgements.

Try figuring out why it is ridiculous.

A guy who assumes "god" is in a thin position to call
others on assumptions.

And of course, you have no examples of
what you sayvI do.

 

[James2028]

I'm disappointed with online religious
forms. Certain individuals do nothing
but harass and make personal insults.

Resident trolls, haters.
As soon as anyone resciprocates,
they report.


.

 

[sojourner]

I'm disappointed with online religious
forms. Certain individuals do nothing
but harass and make personal insults.

Resident trolls, haters.
As soon as anyone resciprocates,
they report.


.

If you post ridiculous assertions as “fact,” and your sources are dubious, you’re going to get blowback. Do you know why there are translations subsequent to the 1611 KJV? First of all, no one can read that English anymore. Second, subsequent textual discoveries have been made that the King James scholars didn’t have access to. If changes have occurred to the texts, it’s because we’ve discovered better sources. Translators don’t do this work to dupe us.

Then, there’s the problem of “direct revelation,” when we know that many OT texts are taken from earlier, non-Judaic texts: Egyptian, Ugaritic, Babylonian, Akkadian, Assyrian. “Pure text” is a fantasy and the result of disingenuous scholastic gymnastics. And you don’t expect blowback?

 

[James2028]

The AV 1611 KJV Holy Bible
first edition is the most published,
distributed, translated,
preached and believed
Book of all time.

KJV Psalm 12:6
6 The words of the Lord are pure words
as silver, tried in a furnace of earth,
purified seven times.

 

[James2028]

KJV Bible Christians
founded the United States
of America and wrote the
Declaration of Independence,
the Constitution, the Bill of Rights
and the Emancipation Proclamation.

There where no manuscript
revisions of the 1611 KJV
until the 1881 RV.

 

[James2028]

KJV Bible Christians founded Harvard,
Yale and Princeton.

All English speaking denominations
promoted the King James Holy Bible.
Today there are over 300 revisions
of the AV1611 KJV Holy Bible.

KJV for we are not as many
which corrupt the word of God

 

[James2028]

There is only one King James version,
14 spelling, punctuation and
measurement editions.

Additional evidence
for the Record Theory.

 

[Clear]

I believe all scripture is given by
inspiration of God and is profitable
for doctrine, reproof, correct
and instruction.

There are two types of Bibles
Holy Bibles and Corrupt Bibles

Hi @James2028, Like Sojourner, I am confused as to what specific point you are trying to make regarding the KJV version of the bible.

For example, you seem to be trying to quote 2Tim 3:16 above, but there is no greek New Testament that reads according to your quote. Are you trying to point out that the KJV is one of the corrupt Bibles because it's translation doesn't follow the Greek? What point are you trying to make?

Clear
τωακειτζω

 

[James2028]

Did you read the entire thread ?

 

[James2028]

There are three positions
in Bible canonization.
#1. none of the original
were infallible
#2. only the originals autographs
were infallible
#3. purified text theory

It's this simple.

 

[James2028]

Here's the reasoning.

KJV All scripture is given by God

KJV The words of the Lord are pure words
as silver tried in a furnace of earth,
purified seven times.

KJV oh that they were printed in a book

While all scripture are records,
the outstanding record of scripture
and the scripture of final authority
is the published text and form of the
AV 1611 KJV Holy Bible
first edition.

The AV 1611 KJV Holy Bible
is the most published, distributed,
translated, preached and believed
Book of all time.

This is not the Original Only position
and this is not the KJV Only position.

There are two types of Bibles,
Holy Bibles and Corrupt Bibles.

It is dishonest to refer to a book
as scripture while believing that
only the originals were infallible.

The theory is that the Lord himself
canonized and purified his words.

KJV Thou shalt keep them, O Lord,
thou shall preserve them

This is the truest Sola Scriptura
theology.

 

[Clear]

Here's the reasoning.

KJV All scripture is given by God...

Hi James2028

My point is that you seem to be honoring the KJV with some statements, but then you repeatedly quoted a verse from the KJV that is a known corruption in translation.
Therefore I can't tell if you are pointing out that the KJV is one of the "corrupted" bibles you described or you think it is a good translation.

Why honor the KJV and then quote an erroneous text from it?

Secondly, are you trying to make the point that all non-original bibles are corrupt, since only the autographs are without error but they no longer exist (i.e. we no longer have them)?

Your posts are confusing regarding this specific point

Clear
τωακνεειω

 

[James2028]

I can't take you seriously.
Dr. Ruckman read 6,000 books
before his doctorate and
the King James Holy Bible
150 times.

Have you read his book
Problem Texts where he
solves 400 problem texts ?

As far as I'm concerned
your just like Dr. Sojourner,
unresponsive

I said there are only three
theories of Bible canonization.


.